|
The fact that Traithe sent a written proposal as requested shows that he did ask permission. The question is not of whether permission was asked, but of whether or not it was granted (according to legal and/or moral definitions).
Legally, a written proposal is an offer under contract law. Traithe sent a written proposal, as was expressly requested by the offeree. Therefore, I would guess that the best defense could be found under the contract law, specifically in relation to implied contracts. The failure to expressly deny permission after Traithe sent a written proposal as requested might be interpreted legally as an implied acceptance.
Thus, Traithe's actions might be perfectly legal, both technically and in the spirit of the law. Of course, in the case of contract law, there would be the question of whether or not value is being given in return, something required for a contract to be valid; but I suppose it might be said that, simply by creating a MUD for Tolkein fans to play in, Traithe may be giving value. Of course, I'm no expert on contract law, so I may be wrong all the way around.
Even if Traithe's actions turn out to be illegal in a technical, strictly worded sense, whether or something is truly illegal is generally determined by whether or not a person made a reasonable effort to follow the spirit of the law. Traithe has certainly made a reasonable effort to make the right people knowledgeable of his intentions, and his intentions certainly seem to be in line with the norms of the Tolkein community, a community of which the Tolkein industry has ample indication of approval. (And why wouldn't they? The fan community is the main driving force of the industry.) Finally, he has not yet seemed to have broken his promise to remove the mud should permission ever be denied.
I think the difference between Traithe's actions and Vryce's actions should be obvious. Traithe has potential defenses on both the technical and moral side of the law. In the end, Vryce quite obviously had neither.
|